Chicago Bears' Josh McCown throws during the second half of an NFL football game against the Green Bay Packers Monday, Nov. 4, 2013, in Green Bay, Wis. (AP Photo/Mike Roemer)

Nov. 27, 2013
10:30 p.m.

ESPN unveiled a new stat a couple of years ago that measures everything a quarterback does, running, passing, avoiding sacks, etc., because it said passer rating tells an incomplete story. Well, look who passed Peyton Manning and Nick Foles to now lead the NFL.Total Quarterback Rating wasn't exactly revolutionary. It's a lot like DVOA (defense-adjusted value over average), DYAR (defense-adjusted yards over average), Win Probability Added and Expected Points Added by two of my favorite analytical sites Football Outsiders and Advanced NFL Stats.One of the things that I dislike so much about passer rating is that an interception on a Hail Mary can deflate your numbers so much, while garbage-time passes or 10-yard passes on third-and-15 can make you look so much better than you actually are. These new stats account for that. All of them give you more points for a 3-yard pass on fourth-and-2 than a 20-yard pass on third-and-25, while passer rating would do just the opposite.Anyway, it was Total QBR that had Andrew Luck ahead of RG III last year, while passer rating did the opposite.This year, Total QBR has Josh Freeman, Geno Smith and Brandon Weeden as the three worst quarterbacks in the NFL. Anything that puts those three at the bottom can't be too far off.The thing that Total QBR does that DVOA, DYAR, Win Probability Added and Expected Points Added doesn't do is that it's not a counting stat. The others, like RBIs and home runs in baseball, give the advantage to players who have more opportunities. Total QBR shows what you have done in those opportunities, like batting average. Of course, that can be skewed too; just as it's easier to hit .300 for two weeks than for a full season it's easier to have one or two good games at quarterback than it is for a full season.Still, one of the best arguments for keeping Jay Cutler was his high Total QBR this year. Thanks to a pair of last-seconds wins early in the season, Cutler had always been in the top six this year, ahead even of Aaron Rodgers. He has now slipped to No. 10, which is still quite good.But Josh McCown is No. 1.And it's not as if McCown is a tiny sample size. He has thrown slightly more than half as many passes as Cutler this year.Any way, Total QBR is just the latest indication that the Bears should not re-sign Jay Cutler to a long-term contract at the end of this season. By almost any measure, Cutler has had his best season in Chicago this year under new coach Marc Trestman, yet by all those measures except the volume ones, journeyman backup Josh McCown has been even better.I like Jay Cutler and I have always liked Jay Cutler. Even with his flaws, he is a significant upgrade over the crowded clown car of quarterbacks Chicago has traditionally trotted out. But that doesn't mean the Bears have to go back to Red Grossman, Cade McNown or Craig Krenzel if they let Jay Cutler go.Josh McCown has now shown that others can play quarterback well in Chicago under Marc Trestman. Why not take a chance in a draft so deep in talent that nine quarterbacks have first- or second-round draft grades? That could not only be an upgrade, but a $15 million a year savings under the salary cap.And I am not saying just to let Jay Cutler go. How about doing what the Bears did with Lance Briggs? The Bears didn't want to pay Briggs what he thought he was worth, so he became a free agent. When no one else signed him, Briggs came back to Chicago, and did so at a bargain price and continued to make the Pro Bowl every year.I still want Jay Cutler as a Chicago Bear. Just not at a Joe Flacco price. Not even at a price $20 or $30 or even $40 million under Flacco's $120-million cost.Simply put: Josh McCown has shown that losing Jay Cutler would be better than keeping Jay Cutler at a $100 million cost that would cause the Bears to lose too many other players.